Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 23rd, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Hundreds of Thousands Join March for Science Rallies Across the World.
By Oliver Milman, Guardian UK
22 April 17
More than 600 marches held around the world, with organizers saying science ‘under attack’ from a White House that dismisses the threat of climate change
undreds of thousands of climate researchers, oceanographers, bird watchers and other supporters of science rallied in marches around the world on Saturday, in an attempt to bolster scientists’ increasingly precarious status with politicians.
The main March for Science event was held in Washington DC, where organizers made plans for up to 150,000 people to flock to the national mall, although somewhat fewer than that figure braved the rain to attend. Marchers held a range of signs. Some attacked Donald Trump, depicting the president as an ostrich with his head in the sand or bearing the words: “What do Trump and atoms have in common? They make up everything.”
More than 600 marches took place around the world, on every continent bar Antarctica, in events that coincided with Earth Day.
The marches, the first of their kind, were officially non-political. They were however conceived by three US-based researchers – Caroline Weinberg, Valorie Aquino and Jonathan Berman – after Trump’s inauguration. Organizers have said science is “under attack” from the Trump administration and many protesters excoriated the president with signs that likened him to a dangerous orange toxin or disparaged his now defunct university.
Trump released a statement that insisted his administration was committed to preserving the “awe-inspiring beauty” of America, while protecting jobs.
“Rigorous science is critical to my administration’s efforts to achieve the twin goals of economic growth and environmental protection,” Trump said. “My administration is committed to advancing scientific research that leads to a better understanding of our environment and of environmental risks.
“As we do so, we should remember that rigorous science depends not on ideology, but on a spirit of honest inquiry and robust debate.”
The US marches were some of the last to take place, following hundreds across the world. A common theme among protesters was a worry that politicians have rejected science-based policies.
“I’m encouraged by the marches I’ve seen already taking place around the world,” said Rush Holt, a former congressman and head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “For generations scientists have been reluctant to be in the public square. There is a lot of concern.”
Speakers in Washington included Christiana Figueres, the former United Nations climate chief and climate scientist Michael Mann. Hundreds of scientific institutions, environmental groups and union groups partnered with the march.
“There’s very low morale among government scientists because science is under assault from this administration,” Mann told the Guardian. “That being said, events like this will lift the spirits of scientists. They are finding a voice.”
Pharmaceutical companies, concerned about the impact on research talent of Trump’s attempts to ban or restrict travel from certain Muslim-majority countries, risked his wrath by supporting the march. In a video, Pfizer said it was “proud to stand behind our scientists”.
Trump has galvanized scientists with his comments about climate change, which he has called a “hoax”, as well as questions about whether vaccines are safe and threats to cut funding to universities that displease him.
The White House’s recent budget proposal would remove around $7bn in science funding, with the National Institutes of Health, which funds medical research, bearing much of the pain. Earth sciences, ranging from weather satellites to marine research to coastal preservation, are also lined up for severe cuts.
Climate change was at the heart of the March for Science, spurred on by dismissals of the issue by Trump and his top advisers. Budget director Mick Mulvaney has said climate research is a “waste of your money”. Scott Pruitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, has erroneously denied that carbon dioxide is a primary driver of global warming.
Other areas of science have been all but abandoned. The president has yet to nominate administrators for Nasa and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, nor to appoint his own science adviser.
John Holdren, science adviser during Barack Obama’s presidency, said Trump had “shown no indication of awareness of the role of science and the role of science in government”.
“Scientists are understanding that they have to become activists, that they have to speak up, that they have to be heard,” he said. “The message isn’t, ‘Please save our jobs.’ Scientists would be in another line of work if they were just interested in their salaries. If funding for science is slashed, all of society will lose out.”
The march has proved controversial within the science community, which is typically reluctant to be overtly political. Some scientists have raised concerns that the marches will invite attacks by Trump and his supporters, or will fail to convince the public that science has inherent value.
But several famous voices have joined the cause. “Science has always been political but we don’t want science to be partisan,” Bill Nye, a prominent engineer and TV personality, told the Guardian.
“Objective truths have become set aside and diminished and lawmakers are acting like a strong belief in something is as valid as careful peer review.”
Nye said science was in a “dangerous place” but hoped the march would help nudge Trump to a more amenable position.
“The president changes his mind quite frequently,” he said. “We want to influence the people who influence him. That’s our goal for the march.”
Leland Melvin, a former Nasa astronaut who participated in two missions, criticized the administration’s plans to eliminate Nasa’s education budget.
“Doing that would keep people like me from getting a masters or PhD,” he said. “If we want brown people and women getting these degrees and get them involved in science, we have to fund it. The administration needs to get its head out of the sand.”
Cristian Samper, president of the Wildlife Conservation Society, said the march aimed “to celebrate science, not to politicize it”.
“Science is behind the good news and bad news about wildlife conservation ,” he said. “it has nothing to do with the fake news. Science is the antithesis of fake news.”
The marches came one week before the People’s Climate March, a series of large-scale events focused on climate change that will be more overtly political.
“Attacks on science don’t just hurt scientists, they hurt scientists’ ability to protect the people, and climate change epitomizes that,” said Dr Geoffrey Supran, an expert in renewable energy at Harvard University.
“When politicians cater to fossil fuel interests by denying the basic realities of climate science and pursuing anti-science climate policy, they endanger the jobs, justice, and livelihoods of ordinary people everywhere.”
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 22nd, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Bertelsmann Stiftung at PRESSE CLUB CONCORDIA, Bankgasse 8, 1010 Vienna.
TUESDAY APRIL 25, 2017, 11:00-14:00
with Academics originally from Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Nigeria, Sudan.
In 2015 – one million refugees to europe; in 2016 – 300,000; in 2017 – what now?
TURKEY IS A SPECIAL CASE – Many of their Austrian Residents and Citizens are now lining up
at the Turkish government representations to turn back their Turkish Passports and renouncing their Turkish Citizenship. This in order to avoid the Stigma of dual citizenship that
Mr. Erdogan forced theM into by campaigning among them for his intent to undo democracy in his country. They voted for him forgetting that he became persona non grata in Europe and so will they.
’Escaping the escape – Europe and the refugee crisis’
Tuesday, 25 April 2017, 11:00-14:00 hrs
Bertelsmann Stiftung in cooperation with The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (wiiw)
Presseclub Concordia Bankgasse 8
In 2015, more than one million refugees and migrants came to Europe, in 2016 nearly 300,000. How many will enter in 2017? What can we, in Europe, expect with wars and conflicts continuing and driving people from our neighbourhood to European shores? What is the situation in the source and transit countries of refugees and migrants that are most affected? How can the life of refugees, migrants and host communities be improved?
Listen to and debate with experts from Afghanistan, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Libya, Sudan and Nigeria: what solutions for the humanitarian migration crisis do they recommend? What are their proposals for EU actors to improve European policies?
Be our guest and meet
Mariam Safi, Afghanistan, founding director of the Organization for Policy Research and Development Studies (DROPS);
Dane Taleski, FYROM, adjunct professor at the South East European University in T etovo/Skopje;
Zakariya El Zaidy, Libya, protection team leader for the Danish Refugee Council in Libya; J. Shola Omotola, Nigeria, professor of Political Science at the Federal University Oye
Ekiti in Nigeria; and
Amira Ahmed Mohamed, Sudan, assistant professor at the Department of International Development and Social Change at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts.
We will take this opportunity to launch a new Bertelsmann Stiftung publication
’Escaping the Escape – Toward solutions for the humanitarian migration crisis’
Please register for the event.
AND FOR THE ERDOGAN IMPOSED PROBLEM OF THE AUSTRIAN TURKS:
Zweitpass zurück! Türken stürmen nun die Konsulate
Angst vor Strafen
Neuer Wirbel um illegale Doppelstaatsbürger: Die heimischen Konsulate werden auch nach dem Ende des türkischen Verfassungsreferendums von Austro-Türken gestürmt – diesmal allerdings nicht wegen eines “Ja” zur umstrittenen Reform von Präsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan, sondern um verbotene Zweitpässe abzugeben! Offenbar geht die Angst vor Strafen um …
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 21st, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Thousands to march in defFence of science
By ALEKSANDRA ERIKSSON, THE EUOBSERVER
BRUSSELS, April 21, 2017
Thousands of people in hundreds of places worldwide will take to the streets in support for science on Earth Day, taking place this year on Saturday (22 April), in an event underlining the difficult relationship between science and politics.
The idea of a global March of Science developed shortly after the inauguration of US president Donald Trump in January, amid fears that his term would be marked by disregard for facts and research.
Some 517 rallies have been registered so far, with the main one taking place in Washington.
But Calum MacKichan, a Scotsman who organises the march in Brussels, said the goal was much broader than just an anti-Trump protest.
“We want to celebrate science and the role it plays in everyday lives, protect facts and promote dialogue between the scientific community and the public,” MacKichan said at a press event on Thursday (20 April).
Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, a Belgian professor who is the former vice-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and Bas Eickhout, a Dutch MEP for the Green group, were also present at the gathering.
They said there was need for scientists to play a wider role in public life, also on this side of the Atlantic.
Van Ypersele welcomed that Earth Day’s theme this year is climate literacy, and said scientists should be in broader dialogue with both the public and politicians.
Eickhout, who trained as a chemist and worked as a climate change researcher at the Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, said he entered politics “out of frustration that politicians made so little with science”.
“We are pointing fingers at Trump, but we should also point them at ourselves,” he added.
Politicians are dependent on research if they are to make good decisions, but many scientists are afraid of actively providing information to politicians, Eickhout said.
“They fear it makes them into lobbyists. But I don’t think it’s lobbying what you are doing, it’s about informing decision-makers throughout the legislative process,” he said.
This would help to strengthen EU policies, he said.
The European Commission, since 2001, has been conducting impact assessments for all major legislative proposals, covering the potential economic, social and environmental benefits and costs of each proposed policy.
But Eickhout said the assessments were not as objective as one would think. Rather, impact assessments usually portray the commission’s preferred scenario as the best option.
“If I was the commission, I would do the same, so I don’t blame them for this. But I blame them for claiming that the assessments are neutral, when they in fact are designed to fit the political interests of those that commanded them,” Eickhout said.
Trump’s actions could seem like a golden opportunity for green parties, but Eickhout wasn’t so sure.
“If you really want to get policies off the ground you need a broader political basis. I fear that in Europe, climate sceptics, who had a sleeping existence, are now waking up again. They see Trump’s election as an opportunity,” the Dutch MEP said.
The new US president has said the concept of global warming was made by the Chinese in order to make US manufacturing less competitive.
Van Ypersele said, however, that Trump has also shown signs he believed in climate change.
In 2009, Trump had signed a full-page advertisement in The New York Times calling for “meaningful and effective measures to combat climate change”, just before president Barack Obama departed for the climate summit in Copenhagen.
His organisation has also used the term “global warming and its effects” when applying for a permit to build protection against coastal erosion for his golf course in Ireland.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 20th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
CLIMATE – The New York Times
More Permafrost Than Thought May Be Lost as Planet Warms
By HENRY FOUNTAIN, APRIL 11, 2017
As global warming thaws the permafrost, the frozen land that covers nearly six million square miles of the earth, a big question for scientists is: How much will be lost?
The answer, according to a new analysis: more than many of them thought.
A study published Tuesday in the journal Nature Climate Change suggests that as the planet warms toward two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels, each degree Celsius of warming will lead to the thawing of about 1.5 million square miles of permafrost.
That figure is at least 20 percent higher than most previous studies, said Sarah E. Chadburn, a researcher at the University of Leeds in England and the lead author of the study.
“Previous estimates of global changes in permafrost were done using climate models,” Dr. Chadburn said. “Our approach is more based on using historical observations and extrapolating that to the future. It’s a very simple approach.”
How Americans Think About Climate Change, in Six Maps
Americans overwhelmingly believe that global warming is happening, and that carbon emissions should be scaled back. But fewer are sure that it will harm them personally.
Permafrost thaws slowly over time, but it is already causing problems in the Arctic, as slumping ground affects building foundations, roads and other infrastructure in places like the North Slope of Alaska, Yukon and parts of Siberia. The thawing also contributes to climate change, as warmed-up organic matter is decomposed by microbes, releasing more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
Dr. Chadburn and her colleagues looked at how much permafrost would thaw if temperatures were to stabilize at a warming of two degrees Celsius, long a target of climate accords, or at 1.5 degrees, which the 2015 Paris agreement set as an ambitious goal.
A two-degree increase, the researchers found, would lead to a loss of about 2.5 million square miles of permafrost compared with a 1960-90 baseline, or about 40 percent of the current total.
The study showed the advantages to be gained from limiting warming to 1.5 degrees: Thawing would be reduced by about 30 percent, or 750,000 square miles.
Graphic: How 2016 Became Earth’s Hottest Year on Record
But the research also shows the potentially devastating consequences of missing either of those targets. Warming of five degrees Celsius (nine degrees Fahrenheit) would leave at most about a million square miles of permafrost, or less than 20 percent of the current total.
Edward A. G. Schuur, a permafrost expert at Northern Arizona University, said the study was “an important and interesting calculation of where permafrost will be at some distant point in the future as we undergo climate warming.”
“What’s really important is this is based on totally different assumptions,” Dr. Schuur said. “It’s useful because it gives us a different perspective.”
Dr. Chadburn said her study did not delve into the details of how different permafrost areas might be affected. Dr. Schuur said that as the planet warms, more southerly regions, where the permafrost occurs in discontinuous patches, would be expected to thaw first.
But there will still be changes even in areas of extensive permafrost in the far north, Dr. Schuur said. “There will be surface changes that affect everyone who lives there,” he said.
“I don’t think there’s any place in the permafrost zone that’s remote enough to escape changes.”
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 13th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
NOV 23, 2016 @ 02:38 PM 60,058
Why Clean Energy Can Withstand Changing Political Winds
Capital Creates Change – Clean-energy-election-hero.
When President Obama first took office in 2008, it was hard to imagine how solar and wind would ever stand on their own as viable alternative sources of energy. Today, solar and wind are so price-competitive that players in the renewables industry were among the few that could afford to be cavalier about who won the U.S. election.
“The increasingly favorable economics of renewables are more important than the presidential election’s impact on the industry, in our view,” says Stephen Byrd, a senior analyst with Morgan Stanley. “Wind and solar are price-competitive in many parts of the U.S. It’s the economics and not the politics that’s driving the use of renewables.”
Over the past seven years, the cost of wind power has dropped from $60-$100 per megawatt-hour (MWh) to around $15-$25/MWh in the middle third of the U.S., and for large solar installations, it’s gone from $100-$300 to $40-$70 per MWh. Wind power is currently the cheapest source of energy in the middle third of the country, with its all-in cost of $15-$25/MWh, comparing with the $55-$65/MWh for a new natural-gas-fired plant.
Driving their growing competitiveness are improvements in wind and solar technology, as well as some technical efficiency gains. Product Tax Credits, passed by Congress in 2015, will now provide the next bridge to ever-improving solar and wind economics going into 2020, although Morgan Stanley’s analysts argue in a recent report that neither depend on tax credits for survival.
“By the next decade, we project that wind and solar will be the cheapest resources in certain parts of the country, without any subsidies,” they state in the report. “Even without the Production Tax Credit, wind would be cheaper than gas-fired power by a wide margin. And by 2017, we project that large-scale solar projects in Texas will require revenue of about $45/MWh, lower than that required for a natural-gas-fired power plant.”
Changing Political Winds
President-elect Donald Trump has yet to lay out a comprehensive energy policy, although his comments during campaign speeches reveal his position on climate-change regulation. In May, he told audiences in North Dakota that he was opposed to the Obama Administration’s regulations “that shut down hundreds of coal-fired power plants.”
On the same day, he added: “We’re going to rescind all the job-destroying Obama executive actions, including the Climate Action Plan. We’re going to cancel the Paris Climate Agreement and stop all payments of U.S. tax dollars to UN global-warming programs.”
Analysts say it isn’t clear whether a new president can cancel U.S. signatory to the Paris Climate Agreement. But the climate-change views of Trump’s coming appointment of the ninth Supreme Court Justice could be crucial, should pending legal challenges to the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan ever reach the high court.
Yet, even the failure of the Clean Power Plan wouldn’t slow the growth of renewables, according to the Morgan Stanley report. “Given the favorable economics relative to coal-fired generation of wind power in the middle third of the U.S.; solar in the West and Southwest U.S. and gas-fired generation throughout most of the U.S., we view the impact of the EPA Clean Power Plan as being relatively modest,” says the report.
For more Morgan Stanley Research on clean energy and the impact of changing politics, ask your Morgan Stanley representative or Financial Advisor for the full report, “The US Election: Impacts to Clean Tech and Utilities Skew Positive” (Jul 27, 2016). Plus, more Ideas.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 13th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
from Duncan Douglas
NAEE2017 is your Best Opportunity to Meet the Top Decision Makers in the Nigerian Renewable Energy Industries!
Make a plan now to be part of Africa’s fastest-growing energy market: register to be part of the 7th #NAEE2017; the leading event of renewable energy event Nigeria covering in Solar, Wind, Gas, experts across Africa and beyond.
#NAEE2017 will be held from October 18 – 20, 2017 in Abuja Nigeria.
#NAEE2017 – Nigeria Alternative Energy eExpo 2017 – allows you to showcase your products and services and meet face to face with high-level buyers who come to NAEE to source for solutions to the challenges they face every day. The depth of the conference program and quality of the exhibition have a proven track record of attracting a high-quality and influential audience.
As an Exhibitor, you will:
– Gain visibility in front of influential decision makers.
– Meet with high-level executives.
– Form valuable partnerships with leading services providers.
Don’t miss the best opportunity in 2017 to interact with the most influential Energy professionals in Nigeria – Act Today!
For more information, please contact San Sue, Telephone: +44 203 239 6611 Mobile:+44 770 030 9195
E: info at nigeriaalternativeenergyexpo.org
or Visit www.nigeriaalternativeenergyexpo.org
Douglas Duncan info at nigeriaalternativeenergyexpo.org via lists.iisd.ca
The Advisory Board of the Nigeria Alternative Energy Expo (NAEE 2017) invites Energy experts to present a paper at the 7th NAEE in Abuja, from October 18 to 20, 2017. The 7th Edition of the Nigeria Alternative Energy Expo (NAEE 2017) aims to provide an international forum to facilitate discussion and knowledge exchange of findings of current and future challenges and opportunities in all aspects of renewable and sustainable energy.
This year event theme is “Harnessing tomorrow’s Energy Today: A Unified Approach “». The development of renewable energy will be driven by the mutual exchange between future market requirements and technical innovation. In that respect, the NAEE 2017 offers an excellent opportunity for the whole value chain, from equipment and material suppliers up to application driven players and from academic research institutions up to downside industry, to share and discuss leading-edge renewable energy technologies.
Since its beginning in 2011, international attendees representing over 40 countries from all continents have participated in NAEE, internationally renowned keynote speakers have presented latest achievements in the transition to renewable energy.
The scope of NAEE2017 covers a broad range of hot topics like renewable energy technologies, energy efficiency, green energy, climate change, sustainable energy systems and smart grid.
This 7th edition will be organized into 5 PLENARY SESSIONS covering all topics of interest of the whole value chain. We invite you to express interest by visiting: www.nigeriaalternativeenergyexpo…. or send us email: loc at nigeriaalternativeenergyexpo.org
Deadline to submit your abstract was Friday, February 24 2017.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 13th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
From Fareed’s website of Thursday April 13, 2017:
The Deep Danger of AI
The growing embrace of artificial intelligence and “deep learning” raises an important – and potentially troubling – issue, writes Will Knight in MIT Technology Review. What if we can no longer understand the decisions machines make?
“There’s already an argument that being able to interrogate an AI system about how it reached its conclusions is a fundamental legal right. Starting in the summer of 2018, the European Union may require that companies be able to give users an explanation for decisions that automated systems reach,” Knight says.
“This might be impossible, even for systems that seem relatively simple on the surface, such as the apps and websites that use deep learning to serve ads or recommend songs. The computers that run those services have programmed themselves, and they have done it in ways we cannot understand. Even the engineers who build these apps cannot fully explain their behavior.”
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 3rd, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Global Trade Causes More Than 20 Percent of Air-Pollution Deaths
By Nikhil Swaminathan, Grist
03 April 2017
Global trade causes more than 20 percent of air-pollution deaths.
A new study in the journal Nature investigated what triggers the nearly 3.5 million annual deaths worldwide stemming from airborne particulate matter. It attributed more than 750,000 of them to goods being made in one part of the world and consumed in another.
The grim statistics center on Asia, home of cheap exports and lax environmental protections. Nearly 500,000 people succumb to smog-related illness each year on the continent, including more than 200,000 in China and more than 100,000 in India. The incidence of heart disease, lung cancer, and stroke are ratcheted up by breathing filthy air.
The main culprits behind this tragic phenomenon are buyers in the West.
The study links consumption in Western Europe to almost 175,000 yearly deaths abroad and consumption in the U.S. to more than 100,000.
“It’s not a local issue anymore,” says study coauthor Dabo Guan, a professor of climate change economics at the University of East Anglia.
Asian health could benefit if the Trump administration is successful in reviving American manufacturing. Some of that health burden could shift to the U.S., which has higher air-quality standards that should result in fewer smog-related fatalities.
Then again, if Trump has his way with environmental rules, all bets are off.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 30th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
When Russia sold Alaska to the U.S. 150 years ago today, there was consternation on both sides of the Pacific.
American critics railed at the principal negotiator, Secretary of State William Seward, calling the sale “Seward’s Folly” and “Seward’s Icebox.” Russian newspapers are still denouncing the deal.
The Russians sold because they judged the territory a lost cause. After the Crimean War with Britain during the mid-1850s, Moscow determined that Britain would take Alaska in any future conflict.
The transaction cost the U.S. only $7.2 million — approximately $125 million in today’s dollars — to the delight of at least one American paper.
“We have made a fair trade,” argued The Charleston Daily News.
The editors continued, waxing both righteous and pugnacious, that while Europe quarreled over “Eastern questions and German questions, Brother Jonathan” — a national personification and forebear of Uncle Sam — “can sit with sublime indifference on the top of the Alleghenies and spit his tobacco into either the Atlantic or Pacific, whittling huge California timber with a clasp knife made of iron out of his mountains, and mix his cobbler with lemons grown in his own tropics, and cooled with ice brought from his own Arctic circle.”
• Vladimir V. Putin, Russia’s president, visited an Arctic archipelago to reaffirm Moscow’s foothold in the oil-rich region. [Associated Press]
On a tour on the Franz Josef Land archipelago, a sprawling collection of islands where the Russian military has recently built a new runway and worked to open a permanent base, Putin emphasized the need to protect Russia’s economic and security interests in the Arctic.
The Kremlin has named reaffirming the Russian presence in the Arctic as a top priority amid an intensifying rivalry over the region that is believed to hold up to one-quarter of the planet’s undiscovered oil and gas.
“Natural resources, which are of paramount importance for the Russian economy, are concentrated in this region,” Putin said in remarks carried by Russian news agencies.
Putin said that current estimates put the value of Arctic’s mineral riches at $30 trillion.
In 2015, Russia submitted a revised bid for vast territories in the Arctic to the United Nations, claiming 1.2 million square kilometers (over 463,000 square miles) of Artic sea shelf extending more than 350 nautical miles (about 650 kilometers) from the shore.
Russia, the United States, Canada, Denmark and Norway have all been trying to assert jurisdiction over parts of the Arctic as shrinking polar ice creates new opportunities for exploration.
Putin said Wednesday that Russia has remained open to a “broad partnership with other nations to carry out mutually beneficial projects in tapping natural resources, developing global transport corridors and also in science and environment protection.”
He also underlined the need for the military and security agencies to “implement their plans to protect national interests, our defense capability and protection of our interests in the Arctic.”
Over the past few years, the Russian military has been conducting a costly effort to restore and modernize abandoned Soviet-era outposts in the Arctic by rebuilding old air bases and deploying new air defense assets in the region.
During the visit, Putin inspected a cavity in a glacier that scientists use to study permafrost. He also spoke with environmental experts who have worked to clean the area of Soviet-era debris.
Natural Resources Minister Sergei Donskoi reported to Putin that the cleanup effort has seen the removal of 42,000 metric tons of waste from the archipelago, most of it rusty metal oil canisters left behind by the Soviet military.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 29th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
From NRDC, Washington DC – Shahyd, Khalil kshahyd at nrdc.org
Too often, action on climate change is given priority over sustainable development. No place is this disparity more vivid than in the attention and resources devoted to the Paris Climate Agreement (a formal international treaty), and the Sustainable Development Goals (a nonbinding agreement).
Discussions of climate action often neglect the role of wider dimensions of sustainable development in achieving climate goals. When the two are discussed in tandem the framing it most likely to highlight how climate action can spur sustainable development as a co-benefit.
“Sustainable development is not a fortunate byproduct of climate action; it is its organizing principle.”
Below is a new blog post that I hope will open a discussion of how to properly frame sustainable development as a larger priority in our work and vision for a post-carbon world.
Blog: “Sustainable Development is Critical for Climate Action”
And here is an earlier post I released on the day the Paris Climate Agreement became ratified.
Blog: “Celebrate Paris Agreement but don’t forget the SDGs”
Khalil Shahyd – Project Manager
Urban Solutions Program
Natural Resources Defense Council
1152 15th Street NW, Washington, DC 20005
|202.513.6264| www.nrdc.org | kshahyd at nrdc.org
EXPERT BLOG › KHALIL SHAHYD
Sustainable Development Is Critical for Climate Action
March 28, 2017 Khalil Shahyd
Climate activists are often frustrated by the slow pace of national and global actions on climate change. Recognizing the urgent need for action doesn’t always give rise to the political will necessary to follow through, particularly with an issue as complex as transitioning the global economy away from fossil fuels.
A recent paper in Science Magazine titled “A roadmap for rapid de-carbonization” (hereafter “the roadmap”) spells that part out—as does a perhaps more accessible Vox article reviewing it, and both explain in clear detail the scale of the daunting task ahead of us. However, the truth is that too often, discussion of actions required to address climate change neglect the broader dimensions of sustainable development that will be required to meet the U.N.’s ambitious and necessary targets on carbon emissions.
Patricia Espinosa, head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) recently reminded that “the ultimate objectives of the Paris Climate Change Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will be achieved only if they are fully recognized as one encompassing agenda.”
A cynical approach to the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals would be to simply assume they are a random accumulation of aspirations that most rational people would support. They favor, for example, logical steps like ending poverty and hunger, improving health and education, making cities more sustainable, combating climate change, and protecting oceans and forests but are less clear on how they all interact and complement one another.
The roadmap for success breaks the actions necessary to reduce carbon emissions and avoid the 2 degrees Celsius threshold into three 10-year time intervals each representing stages of development in achieving a post-carbon reality. The SDGs can complement these scenarios by ensuring that above all else, action on climate change “leaves no one behind.”
To accomplish that complex and challenging higher purpose, the 17 SDG goals were carefully considered and negotiated and contain numerous linkages to each other and to climate action more broadly.
2017-2020: Establishing the Policy Framework
The authors of the de-carbonization roadmap describe a period from 2017-2020 to set the policies to ensure that the reductions in carbon emissions begin by the end of the period. In addition, they suggest that “all cities and major corporations in the industrialized world should have de-carbonization strategies in place.”
Getting the right policies in place across nations and hundreds of cities, of diverse sizes, histories and economic character will require an extraordinary amount of “political will” to achieve it and the engagement of people and actors across many nations, cities and sectors. More importantly, how and who decides this policy mix will determine the patterns of development, the pace, space and structure of our decarbonized future. It is a critical step in the work that should be inclusive of multiple voices and perspectives.
Goal 17 of the SDGs—on strengthening partnerships—includes key elements of a strategy to build the political will and capacity of cities and nations to respond to the challenging scenario set forth in the de-carbonization roadmap. Achieving these ambitious targets will require a revitalized and enhanced global partnership bringing together governments, civil society, the private sector, the United Nations system and other actors to mobilize all available resources. This means the task will only be successful with strong relationships—no minor point.
2020-2030: Time to Show and Prove
The period between 2020-2030 is the core implementation phase of the de-carbonization strategy (and simultaneously the final 10-year stretch of the 2030 Agenda on the SDGs). Within this period, the roadmap suggest that coal will be about to exit the global energy scene, and carbon pricing should be expanded to cover all greenhouse gas emissions with a minimum price of $50 per metric ton. The authors of note that improving energy efficiency alone could reduce emissions “40 to 50% by around 2030.” Finally a massive new investment in transportation technology, light rail and electrification, along with greater efficiencies in industrial production will round out to core advancements necessary to reduce emissions.
First, eliminating coal from the global energy supply implies a massive shift in energy assets and most importantly labor. SDG Goal 8 helps ensure that the transition from coal does not abandon workers and the communities that rely on revenue from those industries for economic growth.
Second improving energy efficiency is a worthy goal. However, unless attention is paid to the distribution of efficiency services, many low-income families, communities and the institutions that serve them will remain isolated and unserved. The SDGs provide a useful frame to target resources to this fact with Goal 7, ensuring “access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” that includes the target to increase investment in energy efficiency as a percentage of GDP.
Further, the authors identified the need for greater efficiency in industrial production, and the SDGs, too, make a priority of this issue with Goal 12 on sustainable consumption and production patterns. Attaining and sustaining human quality of life requires certain levels of economic growth and development. Ensuring that we meet the physical needs of people without endangering the planet is at the root of this discussion and often most difficult challenge in the transition.
2030-2040: On the Path to Sustainability
During this 10-year period, the policies, institutions and processes driving our transition to a more sustainable society are becoming more mature, including carbon-neutral or carbon-negative building construction.
Internal combustion engines for short distance hauling and personal transit along with fossil driven aircraft will be almost non-existent and oil will be in rapid decline as a the primary fuel in the global energy mix.
This phase is critical for ensuring that the policies established in the initial period and the implementation strategies deployed in the first 10-year increment distribute the benefits and burdens of this transition equitably.
The SDGs offer many goals that can help to focus our efforts in a way to meet multiple objectives. More importantly, we must address the implication of these changes and how they impact the ability of people to choose how and where to live. SDG Goals 1–poverty; 5–gender equity; and 10–reducing inequality respectively provide important frameworks to measuring policy outcomes. For example, how does carbon-neutral or carbon-negative building construction impact the cost of housing for families, particularly in many cities were housing affordability is already at crisis points?
Similarly, shifting from gas-fueled cars to electric vehicles and alternative transit options will have clear impacts on the spatial organization and social structure of cities, including issues of mobility and access. SDG Goal 11, on making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, is a key strategic framework for addressing these specific challenges, as is Goal 9 on inclusive industrialization and a more resilient infrastructure.
Also, some goals of the 2030 sustainability agenda will benefit from improved environmental quality and reduced carbon emissions. However these same goals can provide important incentives and motivations for continuing progress toward the climate agenda.
One such goal is SDG Goal 3 on health and wellbeing. The relationship between climate change and health outcomes is now well understood. Health is often framed as a “co-benefit” to climate action where carbon emissions are the primary target or goal. However in as many cases, climate action and financing can benefit from the priorities of messaging health and wellbeing outcomes as the core priority. Rather than just a co-benefit, investments in health that take climate change impacts into consideration can create complementary relationships between targets on improving health and wellbeing as provided by the SDGs and building public support for climate action.
Additional issues will also have to be fleshed out—such as creating a more sustainable food production system, SDG Goal 2 (Zero Hunger). More than 10 percent of carbon emissions is attributable to the global food industry and a more sustainable food system also goes back to supporting improved health and wellbeing.
Improving the capacity of degraded land and forest cover, SDG Goal 15 (Life on Land); and oceans, seas and larger water bodies, SDG Goal 14 (Life Below Water), to improve ability of these critical ecosystems to act as natural carbon sinks will also prove key to meeting climate targets, according to the roadmap. However, the authors warn that we must be careful in addressing these issues by ensuring to “resolve deployment issues relating to food security, biodiversity preservation, indigenous rights, and societal acceptance.”
2040-2050: Monitor, Evaluate, and Renew
In this final stage of the roadmap, nations are well on their way toward meeting climate goals and are evaluating those processes, with any needed reassessments developed and incorporated immediately.
This is also where the work comes full circle. Just as we began this discussion with SDG Goal 17; we come back to the development of partnerships and inclusive processes to engage the public and civil society in assessments of outcomes, addressing challenges and charting new courses. However, we must not take for granted that various sectors of the public and civil society will have the capacity and interest to participate in these necessary conversations. To ensure that the trust in public institutions exists and that engagement is truly inclusive, SDG Goal 16 on peace, justice and strong institutions is vital to overcoming the conflict and the instability with which many communities now struggle.
Finally, a society that lacks a strong education system will struggle to galvanize the human resources necessary to make difficult decisions and execute them successfully. SDG Goal 4 (Quality Education) serves as a reminder of the central role of education in creating inclusive societies capable of innovation and accountability to the public.
All Together Now
Action on climate change and sustainable development must be considered in tandem.
Climate Change and increased risk of extreme weather resulting in natural disasters have the potential to undermine progress on poverty alleviation, weaken the stability of communities and increase inequality. Similarly, unsustainable development can slow, or threaten progress on climate change, by potentially increasing consumption of fossil fuels as consumers become more wealthy, homes become larger and people rely more on private cars than public transit.
In a previous post I warned against a tendency by many, particularly in the environmental community, to focus on the Paris Climate Agreement while neglecting implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
As the roadmap shows, a global climate solution goes well beyond a mathematical formula for the least costly method of reducing carbon emissions. It requires a global development agenda—one in which all nations are equal participants and engaged.
The SDGs are exactly that, a global development agenda negotiated by the people and nations of the world. The SDGs are comprised of 17 goals further broken out into 169 individual targets that can be further refined and localized to ensure meaningful representation on the ground.
No roadmap can be absolutely precise in its description of such a complex issue at the scale necessary to address climate change. This makes it all the more important that as many people as possible are allowed to engage in thinking through the appropriate strategies.
Sustainable development is not a fortunate byproduct of climate action; it is its organizing principle. As we continue to advance and confront the coming executive actions looming over continued climate action, the integration of the Sustainable Development Goals and actions to address Climate Change provide a blueprint for how we move forward.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Project Manager, Urban Solutions program
EXPERT BLOG › KHALIL SHAHYD
Celebrate Paris Agreement, But Don’t Forget the SDGs
October 05, 2016 Khalil Shahyd
It’s a historic week for the environment, with the Paris Climate agreement entering into effect after the United States, India and the European Union moved to formally join the accord. The inclusion of these large emitters brings the total number of signatories to 71, representing approximately 57 percent of global emissions.
The agreement, which calls on countries to combat climate change and limit global temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius, will take effect in 30 days—an incredibly quick adoption in the history of such agreements.
As we celebrate, and the world looks to implement the agreement, we must remember another critical global agreement that will need to come into play.
What are the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals?
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted on Sept. 25, 2015, at the United Nations headquarters in New York by world leaders from all 193 U.N.-member countries. The goals are built on a 15-year framework and include 17 goals and 169 specific targets, ranging from the eradication of extreme poverty to the provision of clean and affordable energy. The SDGs extend from previous international targets in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), but the SDGs apply to all nations.
Why a sustainable development agenda matters?
Sustainable development, defined by the UN after the Bundtland Comission report, is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” More importantly, “development” can best be understood as a collective vision and the institutional processes that guide how desirable or progressive change in society is best achieved.
As the Paris Agreement comes into effect, meeting our carbon emissions target will imply drastic changes to our global society at the national and local levels. The SDGs provide a way of ensuring our processes for determining the best strategies for reducing carbon emissions are socially embedded in and paired to societal goals such as reducing poverty and inequality.
Social Embeddedness and Environmental Policy
The concept of social embeddedness was first articulated by economic sociologist Karl Polanyi in 1944. Polanyi argued that economies are better understood as embedded in “non-market” institutions such as familial and ethnic relations, religion and politics. These non-market institutions discipline market activity and keep it bound to the collective social vision of society.
The SDGs use this approach to create a universally applied framework for re-embedding climate policy with social goals, and can be a key to ensuring an equitable transition from a fossil-driven global society to a sustainable one. In other words, they reintegrate environmental policy with human social realities, opening the way for a different and more positive way of thinking about altering our economies to remove fossil fuels from our energy mix in a massive economic and industrial transition on a scale never before seen, particularly given the limited time we have to achieve it.
The impacts of this transition, obviously, are likely to be wide-reaching and uneven, but the global consensus—as demonstrated this week—has decided we must proceed nonetheless.
The importance of having shared targets
Much as the Paris Agreement was negotiated by nations before eventually being adopted, the SDGs are global in nature and represent a mutually decided consensus and a common language. The process of creating the SDGs took three years and included input from more than 10 million people, including close to 80,000 Americans.
By adopting universally applicable targets, we are creating greater accountability in our policymaking and response to the climate crisis. We are committing ourselves to meeting specific, measurable outcomes and not just making empty processes to “engage” or be “inclusive.” In the climate context, when we pair emissions targets with additional social targets it reminds us to consider the social outcomes inherent in our various policy responses. Without that we risk creating negative social externalities and unintended consequences.
Reengaging the “development” discipline as progressive politics
The assumption is typically that UN agreements and ideas have little bearing on what happens in the United States. But when we look at problems like the drinking water crisis in Flint and many cities across the nation, a national crisis of housing affordability, persistent poverty, and rising inequality, development isn’t just an issue of need in struggling nations, but a common challenge facing all nations.
When compared internationally, in fact, the U.S. consistently falls in the lower half of industrialized nations on social indicators, and that is reflected in the SDGs. The Sustainable Development Solutions Network, led by Jeffery Sachs, developed an SDG Index and Dashboard to track progress on achieving each of the 17 goals. The U.S. ranks 25th globally, behind nations such as Hungary, Belarus and New Zealand. Further, a recent report by the group, Future of Spaceship Earth, found that the U.S. is not likely to meet 10 of the 17 SDG targets without more deliberate action, particularly the targets on Decent work and economic growth, inequality and climate action. The latter may be due to the fact that our combined policy responses to Climate Change to date fall short of our international commitments to reduce emissions.
Re-engaging a development agenda in the U.S. will require rethinking the purpose and practice of development at the local level. It must be about more than housing and property development. Community advocates working in environmental and economic justice realms will need to reconsider community development as a progressive political strategy. Most importantly, as we delve deeper into the conversation of global climate action, development is the platform through which a much wider and diverse segment of the population can participate. While the average person may not be able to analyze or articulate how much carbon by parts per million is safe in the atmosphere, he or she can talk about the social goals that should be prioritized as we attempt such a massive transition of our global economy.
Such reimagining sounds like a large task but it is already happening. New York City has already adapted its OneNYC plan to the Sustainable Development Goals in a document titled, “Global Vision/Urban Action” and foundations across the country have been meeting for over a year to discuss the role they can play in implementing the SDGs in the U.S.
David Roberts, writing for Vox, may have put it best:
When climate activists say, ‘We have the technology; all we need is the political will,’ they act like that’s good news. But think about the political will we need: to immediately cease fossil fuel exploration, start shutting down coal mines, and put in place a plan for managed decline of the fossil fuel industry; to double or triple the global budget for clean energy research, development, and deployment; to transfer billions of dollars from wealthy countries to poorer ones, to protect them from climate impacts they are most vulnerable to but least responsible for; and quite possibly, if it comes to it, to limit the consumptive choices of the globe’s wealthiest and most carbon-intensive citizens.
I think David lays out the sheer scale of the activity we must undertake.
A climate solution of that magnitude goes well beyond a mathematical formula for the least costly method of reducing carbon emissions in our atmosphere. It requires a global development agenda—one in which all nations are equal participants and engaged.
That is the opportunity the SDGs represent as a globally sanctioned framework and common language toward our collective future.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Project Manager, Urban Solutions program
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 28th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Insights, analysis and must reads from CNN’s Fareed Zakaria and the Global Public Square team, compiled by Global Briefing editor Jason Miks.
March 28, 2017
Trump’s Legacy: “Make China Great Again”?
The “slash-and-burn” approach of President Trump’s executive order on climate rules not only makes “one of humanity’s greatest ever challenges more difficult,” suggests Damian Carrington in The Guardian. It also leaves the door wide open for Beijing to assume America’s global leadership role.
China “is now taking dramatic action to cut emissions, pushed by the foul air many of its citizens suffer and pulled by the likelihood of the low-carbon economy being the greatest growth story of the 21st century,” he says.
“[G]iven the issue’s critical importance for all nations and their unprecedented cooperation to date, it might just signal the end of the U.S.’s dominance as the world’s preeminent political and economic power, with others taking up the mantle. Trump’s campaign pledge was ‘Make America great again’ – his legacy could be ‘Made China great again.’”
China’s Been Busy on Mischief: Report
China has almost completed major construction of “military and dual-use infrastructure” on three reefs in disputed waters in the South China Sea, according to a new report from the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative think tank, based on satellite images. “Beijing can now deploy military assets, including combat aircraft and mobile missile launchers, to the Spratly Islands at any time,” the report says.
Beijing, though, would dispute the disputed label, CNN reports. “Whether we decide to deploy or not deploy relevant military equipment, it is within our scope of sovereignty. It’s our right to self-defense and self-preservation as recognized by international law,” a Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman is quoted as saying.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 28th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
NEW YORK TIMES FIRST PAGE SCIENCE
A Dream of Clean Energy at a Very High Price
By HENRY FOUNTAINMARCH 27, 2017
The doughnut-shaped fusion reactor, or tokamak, and other components are kept cool inside one of the world’s largest vacuum chambers.
SAINT-PAUL-LEZ-DURANCE, France — At a dusty construction site here amid the limestone ridges of Provence, workers scurry around immense slabs of concrete arranged in a ring like a modern-day Stonehenge.
It looks like the beginnings of a large commercial power plant, but it is not.
The project, called ITER, is an enormous, and enormously complex and costly, physics experiment. But if it succeeds, it could determine the power plants of the future and
make an invaluable contribution to reducing planet-warming emissions.
ITER, short for International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (and pronounced EAT-er), is being built to test a long-held dream: that nuclear fusion, the atomic reaction that takes place in the sun and in hydrogen bombs, can be controlled to generate power.
First discussed in 1985 at a United States-Soviet Union summit, the multinational effort, in which the European Union has a 45 percent stake and the United States, Russia, China and three other partners 9 percent each, has long been cited as a crucial step toward a future of near-limitless electric power.
ITER will produce heat, not electricity. But if it works — if it produces more energy than it consumes, which smaller fusion experiments so far have not been able to do — it could lead to plants that generate electricity without the climate-affecting carbon emissions of fossil-fuel plants or most of the hazards of existing nuclear reactors that split atoms rather than join them.
Mimicking the Sun
1 Central magnet induces a current in the plasma, which contains two hydrogen isotopes. Heating begins.
2 External magnets confine plasma as radio waves and microwaves heat it to 150 million degrees Celsius.
3 When plasma is at proper temperature and density, isotopes collide and fuse, releasing high-energy neutrons.
4 Neutrons hit blanket, converting energy into heat. Helium and impurities are removed through diverter at bottom of chamber.
5 In a fusion power plant, the heat would be used to make steam to spin a turbine and generate
Success, however, has always seemed just a few decades away for ITER. The project has progressed in fits and starts for years, plagued by design and management problems that have led to long delays and ballooning costs.
ITER is moving ahead now, with a director-general, Bernard Bigot, who took over two years ago after an independent analysis that was highly critical of the project. Dr. Bigot, who previously ran France’s atomic energy agency, has earned high marks for resolving management problems and developing a realistic schedule based more on physics and engineering and less on politics.
“I do believe we are moving at full speed and maybe accelerating,” Dr. Bigot said in an interview.
The site here is now studded with tower cranes as crews work on the concrete structures that will support and surround the heart of the experiment, a doughnut-shaped chamber called a tokamak. This is where the fusion reactions will take place, within a plasma, a roiling cloud of ionized atoms so hot that it can be contained only by extremely strong magnetic fields.
Pieces of the tokamak and other components, including giant superconducting electromagnets and a structure that at approximately 100 feet in diameter and 100 feet tall will be the largest stainless-steel vacuum vessel ever made, are being fabricated in the participating countries. Assembly is set to begin next year in a giant hall erected next to the tokamak site.
At the ITER construction site, immense slabs of concrete lie in a ring like a modern-day Stonehenge. Credit ITER Organization
There are major technical hurdles in a project where the manufacturing and construction are on the scale of shipbuilding but the parts need to fit with the precision of a fine watch.
“It’s a challenge,” said Dr. Bigot, who devotes much of his time to issues related to integrating parts from various countries. “We need to be very sensitive about quality.”
Even if the project proceeds smoothly, the goal of “first plasma,” using pure hydrogen that does not undergo fusion, would not be reached for another eight years. A so-called burning plasma, which contains a fraction of an ounce of fusible fuel in the form of two hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium, and can be sustained for perhaps six or seven minutes and release large amounts of energy, would not be achieved until 2035 at the earliest.
That is a half century after the subject of cooperating on a fusion project came up at a meeting in Geneva between President Ronald Reagan and the Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev. A functional commercial fusion power plant would be even further down the road.
“Fusion is very hard,” said Riccardo Betti, a researcher at the University of Rochester who has followed the ITER project for years. “Plasma is not your friend. It tries to do everything it can to really displease you.”
Main Tokamak Components
PLASMA CHAMBER AND DIVERTER (BLUE) TOROIDAL MAGNETS
Fusion is also very expensive. ITER estimates the cost of design and construction at about 20 billion euros (currently about $22 billion). But the actual cost of components may be higher in some of the participating countries, like the United States, because of high labor costs. The eventual total United States contribution, which includes an enormous central electromagnet capable, it is said, of lifting an aircraft carrier, has been estimated at about $4 billion.
Despite the recent progress there are still plenty of doubts about ITER, especially in the United States, which left the project for five years at the turn of the century and where funding through the Energy Department has long been a political football.
The department confirmed its support for ITER in a report last year and Congress approved $115 million for it. It is unclear, though, how the project will fare in the Trump administration, which has proposed a cut of roughly 20 percent to the department’s Office of Science, which funds basic research including ITER. (The department also funds another long-troubled fusion project, which uses lasers, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.)
Dr. Bigot met with the new energy secretary, Rick Perry, last week in Washington, and said he found Mr. Perry “very open to listening” about ITER and its long-term goals. “But he has to make some short-term choices” with his budget, Dr. Bigot said.
Energy Department press aides did not respond to requests for comment.
Some in Congress, including Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, while lauding Dr. Bigot’s efforts, argue that the project already consumes too much of the Energy Department’s basic research budget of about $5 billion.
Pillars at the ITER Cryoplant in Provencal; Bernard Bigot, the ITER director-general, previously ran France’s atomic energy agency. Credit ITER Organization
“I remain concerned that continuing to support the ITER project would come at the expense of other Office of Science priorities that the Department of Energy has said are more important — and that I consider more important,” Mr. Alexander said in a statement.
While it is not clear what would happen to the project if the United States withdrew, Dr. Bigot argues that it is in every participating country’s interest to see it through. “You have a chance to know if fusion works or not,” he said. “If you miss this chance, maybe it will never come again.”
But even scientists who support ITER are concerned about the impact it has on other research.
“People around the country who work on projects that are the scientific basis for fusion are worried that they’re in a no-win situation,” said William Dorland, a physicist at the University of Maryland who is chairman of the plasma science committee of the National Academy of Sciences. “If ITER goes forward, it might eat up all the money. If it doesn’t expand and the U.S. pulls out, it may pull down a lot of good science in the downdraft.”
In the ITER tokamak, deuterium and tritium nuclei will fuse to form helium, losing a small amount of mass that is converted into a huge amount of energy. Most of the energy will be carried away by neutrons, which will escape the plasma and strike the walls of the tokamak, producing heat.
In a fusion power plant, that heat would be used to make steam to turn a turbine to generate electricity, much as existing power plants do using other sources of heat, like burning coal. ITER’s heat will be dissipated through cooling towers.
There is no risk of a runaway reaction and meltdown as with nuclear fission and, while radioactive waste is produced, it is not nearly as long-lived as the spent fuel rods and irradiated components of a fission reactor.
To fuse, atomic nuclei must move very fast — they must be extremely hot — to overcome natural repulsive forces and collide. In the sun, the extreme gravitational field does much of the work. Nuclei need to be at a temperature of about 15 million degrees Celsius.
In a tokamak, without such a strong gravitational pull, the atoms need to be about 10 times hotter. So enormous amounts of energy are required to heat the plasma, using pulsating magnetic fields and other sources like microwaves. Just a few feet away, on the other hand, the windings of the superconducting electromagnets need to be cooled to a few degrees above absolute zero. Needless to say, the material and technical challenges are extreme.
Although all fusion reactors to date have produced less energy than they use, physicists are expecting that ITER will benefit from its larger size, and will produce about 10 times more power than it consumes. But they will face many challenges, chief among them developing the ability to prevent instabilities in the edges of the plasma that can damage the experiment.
Even in its early stages of construction, the project seems overwhelmingly complex. Embedded in the concrete surfaces are thousands of steel plates. They seem to be scattered at random throughout the structure, but actually are precisely located. ITER is being built to French nuclear plant standards, which prohibit drilling into concrete. So the plates — eventually about 80,000 of them — are where other components of the structure will be attached as construction progresses.
A mistake or two now could wreak havoc a few years down the road, but Dr. Bigot said that in this and other work on ITER, the key to avoiding errors was taking time.
“People consider that it’s long,” he said, referring to critics of the project timetable. “But if you want full control of quality, you need time.”
‘Learning Curve’ as Rick Perry Pursues a Job He Initially Misunderstood JAN. 18, 2017
Start-Ups Take On Challenge of Nuclear Fusion OCT. 25, 2015
The Challenge: How to Keep Fusion Going Long Enough MARCH 17, 2014
Giant Laser Complex Makes Fusion Advance, Finally FEB. 12, 2014
A version of this article appears in print on March 28, 2017, on Page D1 of the New York edition with the headline: A Dream Machine.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 17th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
UNITED NATIONS, UNICEF AND SMURFS TEAM UP TO CELEBRATE INTERNATIONAL DAY OF HAPPINESS.
Small Smurfs Big Goals campaign inspires support for Sustainable Development Goals.
The UNF, New York, March 18 – Voice actors from the upcoming animated movie Smurfs: The Lost Village today joined officials from the United Nations, UNICEF and United Nations Foundation at the world body’s headquarters in New York to celebrate International Day of Happiness with a campaign promoting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The “Small Smurfs Big Goals” campaign is designed to encourage young people everywhere to learn about and support the 17 Sustainable Development Goals adopted by world leaders in 2015 to help make the world more peaceful, equitable and healthy.
As part of the celebrations, Team Smurfs recognized three young advocates — Karan Jerath (20), Sarina Divan (17), and Noor Samee (17) — for their actions to promote the Goals.
Jerath, a UN Young Leader for the Sustainable Development Goals, invented a containment device that could prevent offshore oil spills and ensure the protection of marine life. Divan expanded a UN Foundation girl empowerment initiative at her high school and beyond, and Samee is a UNICEF blogger and advocate on social justice issues and raising awareness of the Sustainable Development Goals.
The movie’s U.S. stars — Demi Lovato, Joe Manganiello and Mandy Patinkin — presented the three young students with a symbolic key to the Smurfs Village in recognition of their work.
“This inspirational campaign highlights the fact that each and every one of us, no matter how young or old, small or big, can make our world a better and happier place,” said Cristina Gallach, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information. “We are grateful to creative partners like Sony Pictures Animation and Team Smurfs for their spirit of collaboration in helping the UN reach diverse audiences.”
The Small Smurfs Big Goals campaign culminates on the International Day of Happiness on 20 March, which emphasizes the importance of personal happiness and well-being. The idea is closely linked to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, which include decent work for all, access to nutritious food, quality education and health services, and freedom from discrimination.
“Today we have seen how the Small Smurfs Big Goals campaign is giving children and young people a platform to speak out about issues they are passionate about. As we celebrate International Day of Happiness, we hope many more young people are empowered to take action on the Sustainable Development Goals and help achieve a world free from poverty, inequality and injustice,” said Caryl M. Stern, UNICEF US Fund President and CEO.
The actors and UN officials addressed some 1,500 students attending an international Model UN conference in the iconic General Assembly Hall of the United Nations, where they encouraged all participants and the public to join “Team Smurfs”.
The campaign invites the general public to visit SmallSmurfsBigGoals.com to find out how to contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, and share information, ideas and images on social media.
The actors also premiered a new public service announcement video starring cast members of the film that inspires viewers to join the campaign and champion the Sustainable Development Goals.
“We hope the campaign will help us all think about how our actions impact the planet,” said Demi Lovato, who voices Smurfette in the movie. “Every one of us, even a Small Smurf, can accomplish Big Goals!”
The United Nations Postal Administration closed out the blue carpet event by unveiling a special edition stamp sheet featuring the Small Smurfs Big Goals campaign. The film cast along with the Belgian Ambassador to the United Nations, Marc Pecsteen de Buytswerve, and United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Management, Stephen Cutts, presented the Small Smurfs Big Goals UN stamps to the press.
Along with the event at the United Nations, other celebrations took place in 18 countries around the world including Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Russia and the UK, to name a few, to help raise awareness for the “Small Smurfs Big Goals” campaign and the Goals.
“Since 1958, the Smurfs have embodied around the world the universal values of camaraderie, helping one another, tolerance, optimism, and respecting Mother Nature,” said Véronique Culliford, the daughter of Peyo, who created the Smurfs. “It’s been an honor and privilege for The Smurfs to support the United Nations and to continue our longstanding relationship with UNICEF with this campaign focused on raising awareness for the Sustainable Development Goals.”
On March 20, festivities for the International Day of Happiness will culminate in a special ceremony with the film cast along with United Nations, UNICEF and United Nations Foundation officials where they will help turn the Empire State Building blue to commemorate the occasion.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 11th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Exxon eyes Israel after Cyprus win
9 Mar, 2017 14:09
After winning a Cypriot government tender, Exxon Mobile has expressed interest in bidding for Israeli natural gas tenders.
Israeli Minister of National Infrastructure, Energy and Water Resources Yuval Steinitz met last week with senior executives from Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell during his visit to the US. The minister’s associates say that while Royal Dutch Shell will probably not take part in the new tender for oil and gas exploration licenses in Israeli waters, the Exxon Mobil executives came equipped with a great deal of relevant information, and expressed interest in the tender.
The reason is allegedly the announcement two days ago that Exxon had won a tender for oil and gas exploration in Block 10 in Cyprus as part of a consortium with Qatar Petroleum. A group composed of Italian company ENI and Total, and ENI by itself, won the concession for two other blocks in the tender.
In a fourth block already held by Total, the company asked the Cypriot government for permission to add ENI as a 50% partner in the license, because the block is located only six kilometers away from the Egyptian Zohr gas reservoir discovered by ENI. Total expects ENI’s extensive knowledge of the geology in the area to be of use in finding gas in Cyprus.
Steinitz’s associates say that since Exxon is starting to prepare for activity in a nearby area, the company believes that it is likely to prove worthwhile to develop parallel activity in Israel, and to use the same transportation infrastructure to export gas discovered in both countries to Europe.
Steinetz went to Europe early this week, and flew from there to New York and Houston for a week of meetings with energy concerns. In Rome, he met with his Italian counterpart, and held meetings in New York with the Barclays, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan investments banks, as well as with a group of private investors organized by the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). In Houston, he took part in the CERAweek energy conference, and held meetings with energy companies.
Steinitz told “Globes,” I was surprised to see energy ministers and representatives of energy companies from all over the world congratulate us on the beginning of development in Leviathan, after years of delay. Almost everyone had assumed that Leviathan was a lost cause… especially given the global crisis in investments in oil and gas fields and the fact that some of the deep water projects of the Leviathan type have been canceled or postponed in various places around the world.
“In meetings with some of the world’s largest investment banks, they noted the change in Israel’s image in the energy market, from a place to be avoided into a responsible country attractive for energy investments in general, and private gas in particular. The plans we displayed for building an undersea pipeline to Turkey, and from Israel and Cyprus to Greece and Italy, aroused a surprising degree of interest.”
Published by Globes [online], Israel Business News – www.globes-online.com – on March 9, 2017
and appears in many Israeli publications, i.e. The Jerusalem Post, March 10, 2017
SustainabiliTank, sorry for the Trump Administration’s definitive efforts to undo the Obama Administration’s great successes in decreasing the place of oil in the global energy markets,
sees now a decreasing importance of the EPA, Energy Policy, Environment Policy and Global Climate Change avoidance. But also a planed subservience of The State Department to the US oil Interests – the revival of the American Petroleum Institute (API) in the Governing of the USA.
Geting the present Israel Government interested in the cooperation in developing sea resources could perhaps take off some of the pressure in the political arena, though clearly inctreasing
pressure against the potential of an Iranian sea base on Syrian soil. All of this within Israel and US State Department attention.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 8th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Ben Gurion died at 87 on December 1, 1973. Upon his final retirement he said that he will write his biography as a history of his time but he never finished that task. His wife Paula died four years before him and he said he felt like a half man.
Recently, in two separate places, were found the video and the audio tape of an interview by a British media person after his wife’s death. When the video and the audio were put together it became clear that excellent material was there for a documentary film on that amazing small but great man.
Ben Gurion was born October 16, 1886, as David Gruen in Plonsk – a basically small town in then Congress Poland that was part of the Tsarist Empire. The people there were dreaming about the Israel of old – in what was called Palestine. When Herzl came to town he was greeted as if the Messiah arrived.
David reached Palestine first time in 1915 and started out as an agricultural laborer. Jewish farmers came to check the muscles of the offerings.His personal development took time but eventually we see him sitting down with Adenauer, when against the will of many of his followers he accepted reparations for the Holocaust. Ben Gurion realized the young new State needs help and Germany provided training for 5,000 Israeli military personnel and scientists to start the nuclear sector.
Ben Gurion brought together philosopher-giants Hugo Bergman, Martin Buber and others, as the State he envisioned was not to be based on the military but on Judaism, humanism, and democracy. He said that the greatest Jew we had was Moshe (Moses)
Ben Gurion does not define himself as a Zionist and definitely not as a Socialist – he accepts plain Judaism as it appears in the Bible and promoted by the prophets.
It is just simple humanism that comes about from deep thinking or meditation.
He has studied Buddhism but finds greatness not in the thinking but in the doing -and realizing what one finds best in himself. The interviewer wanted to know about the “I” and if one has to rid himself of that “I?” Ben Gurion says to him that the “I” is not the question but the quality of the “I.” Is it an “I” of selfishness, or an “I” of humanity. Buddha was preaching 500 years before Christ and the Bible is not just about Jews.
The people that came to Palestine were looking for peace but to achieve this had to have the capability for wa,r and it was Hashomer active since 1870 that showed the way.
For Israel, with people from many different countries, the army was the best place to bring people together.
Asked if there are things he has done that he is sorry about. He said that you can never know you are not making mistakes – I did things I thought had to be done – so I was at peace with myself.
Asked that most countries that were created after WWII failed as democracies, can Israel continue to be democratic? He said that if the question is peace or territory – he is for peace. And here, though he has no doubt that old Israel gives his country the right for all the territory from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea – he was ready gladly to give up all those lands gained in the Six Days War in exchange for peace. He said then clearly – WE ARE PLEASED WITH THE 1967 BORDERS IN EXCHANGE FOR PEACE.
We want peace on the basis of the Status Quo pre-1967. And here the tape has a series of meetings Ben Gurion had with Musa Alami whom he knew for 40 years
when they represented the two main factions of the land. Now he received phone calls from Mussa Alami when on a trip in London. This part touched memories with me as well as in Buffalo, New York, at the State University I befriended an Alami from that family from the Old City in Jerusalem, and when I went to Jerusalem, but he could not go, after the end of the 1967 fighting, his parents and sister came to see me in the West Jerusalem to send with me some goodies for their son. No doubt, sane people can find ways to coexist
Asked what would he have done after 1967. Ben Gurion said, had he been asked he would have presented his views.
At 85 Ben Gurion was celebrated by the Knesset and the interviewer asked him if he was pleased with what he has done – to which he said it was not him – it was the Halutzim that had the vision. He knows only one person who has done everything by himself – that was Albert Einstein when he invented the theory of Relativity. Everybody else had to work with a group. I never guided Israel – The State does not exist yet!
Regarding his wife Paula, he said she was no zionist nor Socialist, she just followed him to Palestine. Later she said she was not the Prime-Minister’s wife – only the Wife of David Ben Gurion.
David said when the talk was about his age – I was reborn when I came to Israel from New York in 1919 followed by Paula – a new man – so, he was much younger.
Musa Alami (May 3, 1897 – June 8, 1984) (Arabic: Müsa al-‘Al?mi) was a prominent Palestinian nationalist and politician. Due to Alami having represented Palestine at various Arab conferences, in the 1940s Alami was viewed by many as the leader of the Palestinian Arabs.
Alami was born in the Musrara district of Jerusalem, into a prominent family. His father was Mayor of Jerusalem Faidi al-Alami, his sister was married to Jamal al-Hussayni and he was the uncle of Serene Husseini Shahid.
He was first taught at the school of the American Colony and at the French Ecole des Freres in Jaffa. During World War I Alami worked at the censorship office in Damascus. Alami retained a positive view of the Ottoman empire; recalling that the Arabs regarded the Turks as partners rather than oppressors, and above all: Palestine was largely ruled by Palestinian officials. Alami claimed that “a greater degree of freedom and self-government existed in Palestine than in many Turkish provinces”.
Later he studied law at Cambridge University and was admitted to the Inner Temple and graduated with honors degree.
Upon his return to Jerusalem, Musa Alami worked for the legal department of the government of the British Mandate of Palestine and eventually became the private secretary of the High Commissioner General Arthur Grenfell Wauchope. In 1934, Alami participated in talks with the leaders of the Jewish community in Palestine David Ben-Gurion and Moshe Sharett. According to Ben-Gurion, he suggested that the Zionists could provide significant help developing the region, but according to Ben-Gurion, Alami replied that he would prefer waiting one hundred years and leaving the land backward, as long as the Palestinians could do the job themselves.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 7th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
From FAREED ZAKARIA’S Daily Briefing for Tuesday March 7, 2017
“Eurodeterrent” is Going Mainstream
Some European officials are mulling something that until recently had seemed unthinkable – a European Union nuclear weapons program, writes Max Fisher in the New York Times.
“Analysts say that the talk, even if it never translates into action, demonstrates the growing sense in Europe that drastic steps may be necessary to protect the postwar order in the era of a Trump presidency, a resurgent Russia and the possibility of an alignment between the two,” Fisher writes. “Even proponents, who remain a minority, acknowledge enormous hurdles. But discussion of a so-called ‘Eurodeterrent’ has entered the mainstream…”
“Mist of Fear” in Turkey
Opposition voices in Turkey should be given the same kind of support that the West offered dissidents speaking up in the Soviet Union, suggests Timothy Garton Ash in The Guardian.
“To travel to Turkey today is to journey into darkness: tens of thousands of state employees and thousands of academics dismissed, more journalists locked up than in any other country, and a chilly mist of fear.”
China Eyeing Up America’s Backyard?
China is poised to step into the void being left by the Trump administration in America’s own backyard, writes Kevin Gallagher in Foreign Policy.
Latin American nations “are understandably wary of negotiating anything with a government that has denigrated them and called their citizens ‘bad hombres’ and worse,” Gallagher writes. “Enter China, which just days after the election released a new white paper calling Latin America and the Caribbean a ‘land of vitality and hope.’ The plan promises to implement earlier pledges of trade and investment, but without the U.S.-strings attached in terms of deregulation and name-calling.”
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 5th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
As reported by Irith Jawetz from Vienna:
Fareed’s Take: He tackled the 54 billions Trump wants to spend on additional Military. He quoted General Petraeus who told him a few years ago that during the Gulf war he wished he had more Foreign Office people to advise him.
Why? Soldiers do not understand the problems of the Middle East, the difference between the Shiites and Sunis, the history, the culture, and a brave officer who knows how to fight is not enough to win a war.
The Military budget of the US is already huge. It is 9 times the size of the Russian Military budget and 3 times them size of China’s,
Then he interviewed two National Security Advisors. Tom Donillon who was under President Obama and denied the allegation of wiretapping. He also said that Trump has no idea how the system works. The President cannot order wiretapping without a court order. Presidents cannot just order wiretapping..As for Jeff Sessions he was right to recuse himself and should not resign. We have to wait for his new explanation which will come this week.
Stephen Hadley who was National Security Advisor under George W. Bush agreed with Donillon on the wiretapping..Presidents cannot just do it.. If the Obama Administration was really worried about ties to Russia they may have had a reason to do it, but until now there is no proof that it happened. He also said what the panel today said that Trump likes to distract. Whenever something does not go his way and he gets criticized, he tweets something outrageous and diverts from the issue. This now seems to be a general idea floating around.
As for Sessions – he did the right thing and should not resign until he clarifies his position in the coming days. Then we’ll see.
They both agree that: North Korea is the biggest crisis Trump will face now. President Clinton faced the Oklahoma bombing, President Bush 9/11, President Obama the financial crisis and Trump will face North Korea. However if he does not appear to be reliable and trustworthy there will be trouble.
On the idea that Trump’s immigration policy will be good for the economy, Fareed disputes it vehemently. The costs of more agents, building that wall and not having immigrants for menial work will cost more than it will save.
Then he talked about Canada which has now surpassed the USA and a Land of opportunities. In every poll Canada ranks before the US in welfare, economy, freedom, healthcare.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 28th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Yesterday, February 27, 2017 there was a podium discussion at the House of the European Union, Vienna, Wipplingerstrasse 35, 1010 Wien. The topic was the question: “MORE OR LESS EU?”
The main speaker was Professor Karl Aiginger, currently Professor at WU, Vienna and Director
of the Policy Crossover Center, Vienna – Europe, that is a Discussion Platform for European Policy.
Karl Aiginger specializes in industrial organization. He also focuses on the analysis of industrial policy, innovation, the competitiveness of companies, international competition, and the European economic and social model.
He is the founder and publisher of the Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade and was the project leader for the analytical principles underpinning the competition reports of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. He evaluated the Finnish system for innovation on behalf of the Government of Finland and was in charge of the evaluating the system of Austrian research subsidies and funding on behalf of the Federal Government of Austria. He was on the supervisory board of the holding company of nationalized Austrian companies.
It is a main message of Aiginger’s work not to equate competitiveness with low costs or to measure it using the external balance, but to measure it by outcomes, specifically defining competitiveness as the “ability to deliver Beyond GDP goals”. Industrialized countries must follow a strategy based on quality. To us it seems that Professor Aiginger is a clear opponent of the approach used by people like Trump – the line that says make a profit always without looking back at the trail you leave behind.
Yesterday’s panel moderated by Hans Buerger from the Austrian Radio Station ORF, and included also Paul Schmidt from the Austrian Society for European Politics, Katharina Gnath from the Bertelsmann Foundation and Jacques Delors Institute of Berlin, and a young lady, Erza Aruqaj, representing the “millennials” and working with the National Bank, whose head, his Excellency Ewald Nowotny, was in the room.
We report on this meeting because to us it included a true first.
This First came from Professor Aiginger in his introduction, though later on it never was picked up again in the conversations.
Professor Aiginger nailed it down – the present three real European problems are –
TWO OUTSIDE PROBLEMS AND ONE HOME MADE PROBLEM.
The outside problems are:
(1) Trump. Trump likes Brexit and will help possibly other exits.
(2) Putin. Putin makes efforts at destabilizing the Ukraine, the Balkans, the Baltics,
Greece, France, and others.
The home made problem is:
(3) Right Populism. That is the internal EU mechanism that will lead to further exits.
What above says to us is that Professor Aiginger sees the danger of a Trump-Putin scissors that are bound to shape Europe, like the Roosevelt-Stalin scissors did in 1995 at Yalta.
But Professor Aiginger does not despair. He thinks of ways the EU can reorganize – as in effect it has to because of the Brexit that by now ought to be recognized as an accomplished fact. Further more, besides my notes I took last night, I found in today’s Wiener Zeitung a full page article by him – “Europe Without Populism.” that presents 4 principles of his thinking. Yes, Europe does not have to go down the Trump drain – it even can prosper if it learns by looking at the US and the UK – their evolution as pushed by their populists.
Last night, I felt lucky to have had the chance to congratulate Prof. Aiginger for his three “DANGERS” and added that all the rest – the positive part of his work – ought to include also a severe warning to Europe – States, individuals, regions, scientists, economists, educators, media, etc. that they do not just continue to plan for what they think is right – but seriously start to warn the public that there is a very real danger in falling back to Yalta.
Europe does not want just the post-WWII Peace of Yalta, but it must strive to a higher level of what was post-Malta Peace (the Marsaxlokk meeting on board of the Maxim Gorky).
For some more about Prof. Aiginger – his 4 points in print of today are:
(1) The Cornerstones for National Tax-Systems.
(2) The Principles for an innovative Climate Policy.
(3) The coordination of a European Business Policy.
(4) The Globalization of European Values.
The answer in short-hand is thus to do the right things as a union while recognizing the differences between States or Regions.
ALSO – as we wrote here about events at the EU Haus, Vienna – let us publish the list of presentations in their EUROPA: DIALOG series with Journalits and writers.
We already had the first two meetings
— Jan. 31 — Corinna Milborn from PULS 4
— Feb. 14 — Wolfgang Boehm Die Presse -covering Europe – reported on Brussels
the future meetings:
— March 7 — Margaretha Kopeining “Kurrier” correspondent in Brussels
— Msrch 14 — Ben Segenreich ORF and Der Standard from Israel
— March 28 — Carola Schneider ORF from Moscow
— April 4 — Michael Laczinski “Die Presse” from Brussels
— April 18 — Joerg Winter ORF from Turkey
— May 2 — Tim Cupal ORF from Brussel
— May 16 — Christophe Kohl ORF from Paris
— Nay 23 — Tessa Szyszkowitz “Profil” from London
— June 6 — Thomas Seifert “Wiener Zeitung” covers Europe
— June 20 — Doron Rabinovici Writer
As we see much of this is about Brussels
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 9th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 2, 2017
Contact: Clinton Foundation Press Office, press at clintonfoundation.org
President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton to Convene More Than 1,000 Students from Around the World at 10th Annual CGI University Meeting
Now Accepting Applications for CGI University 2017, October 13-15 at Northeastern University in Boston
February 2, 2017 — The 10th annual Clinton Global Initiative University (CGI U) meeting—hosted by President Bill Clinton and Chelsea Clinton—will take place October 13-15, 2017 at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts. More than 1,000 undergraduate and graduate students will be joined by thought leaders from around the world to address some of the most pressing social, economic, and environmental concerns of their generation.
Since its first meeting, CGI U has brought together more than 8,700 students from more than 940 schools, 145 countries, and all 50 states. These students have developed projects including a predictive model for energy efficiency retrofits in New York City buildings, a mentorship program to promote confidence, deconstruct gender stereotypes and build leadership for young girls, a mobile texting app that prevents the sale of counterfeit prescription drugs in the developing world, and the creation of support centers for victims of gender-based violence in Pakistan.
Students interested in attending CGI U 2017 can submit their applications here by May 1, 2017. Students requesting travel/lodging assistance must apply by the early decision deadline of March 1, 2017. Further details on the meeting and application process are below, and can also be found here.
CGI U is one of many service and leadership development programs run by the Clinton Foundation. Other opportunities include the Presidential Leadership Scholars program, a unique initiative created in partnership with the George W. Bush Presidential Center, the Clinton Presidential Center, the George Bush Presidential Library Foundation, and the Lyndon Baines Johnson Foundation to support some of the most promising leaders in America, and the Clinton Foundation Day of Action, a community service program that has mobilized more than 6,000 volunteers who have collectively donated more than 25,500 volunteer hours to date.
CGI UNIVERSITY: A HUB FOR YOUNG INNOVATORS
The Clinton Global Initiative University (CGI U), established in 2007 by President Bill Clinton, brings together college and university students to address global challenges with new, specific, and measurable plans called Commitments to Action. Whether building a digital platform to empower youth in the U.S. foster care system or providing rural Latin American communities with solar energy solutions, CGI U participants are among the world’s most promising young social innovators. Through CGI U’S annual meeting and year-round support, student participants create action plans, build relationships, and participate in hands-on workshops as they carry out their Commitments to Action.
The CGI U meeting takes place at an accredited college or university each year—previous CGI U meetings have been held at Tulane University, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Miami, the University of California at San Diego, the George Washington University, Washington University in St. Louis, Arizona State University, and the University of California at Berkeley.
HOW TO APPLY FOR CGI U 2017
Applications for CGI U 2017 are now open here. To attend CGI U 2017, students must be at least 18 years of age and currently enrolled in an institution of higher education at the time of application. Students who will be at least 18 years of age and enrolled in an institution of higher education by October 2017 are also eligible to apply.
Applicants are required to submit a detailed plan for their Commitment to Action that addresses a specific problem in one of five focus areas: Education, Environment and Climate Change, Poverty Alleviation, Peace and Human Rights, and Public Health.
The CGI U meeting is free to attend, though students must fund their own travel and lodging. Students requesting travel and/or lodging assistance must submit their application by the early decision deadline: March 1, 2017. All other applications must be submitted by the final deadline: May 1, 2017.
For any questions about the application process, please call 212.710.4492 or email cgiu.applicant at clintonglobalinitiativ….
HIGHER EDUCATION FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATORS: JOIN THE CGI UNIVERSITY NETWORK
We are proud to celebrate the fifth anniversary of the CGI University Network—a growing consortium of colleges and universities that support, mentor, and provide seed funding to leading student innovators and entrepreneurs.
The following schools will celebrate five consecutive years of membership in the CGI University Network this year. We applaud their dedication to engaging the next generation of leaders.
Arizona State University
Johnson C. Smith University
Southern Methodist University
The Ohio State University
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
University of California, Berkeley
University of California, San Diego
University of Central Florida
University of Houston
University of Miami
More than 60 schools have already joined for 2017, pledging more than $710,000 to support student commitment-makers from their campuses. All funding for the CGI University Network is raised and provided by participating University Network schools and given directly to students from these schools.
For a current list of universities who have joined the University Network for 2017, please write to the foundation..
CGI University is now accepting applications from eligible students over the age of 18. The early decision deadline is March 1, 2017; the final deadline is May 1, 2017. For more information and to submit an application, please visit cgiu.org
About the Clinton Global Initiative University
The Clinton Global Initiative University (CGI U), established in 2007 by President Clinton, brings together college students to discuss and address global challenges with practical, innovative solutions by making Commitments to Action – new, specific, and measurable initiatives that can be small or large, local or global, financial or nonmonetary in nature. Through its annual meeting and ongoing programmatic support, CGI U supports students in their efforts to create action plans, build relationships, participate in hands-on workshops, and follow up as they complete their projects.
CGI U is proof that young people have the power to make a significant impact by confronting some of the world’s most urgent challenges. Since it’s first meeting, CGI U has brought together more than 8,700 students from more than 940 schools, 145 countries, and all 50 states, and nearly $3 million in funding has been awarded to these commitment-makers through CGI U. These students have made more than 6,250 Commitments to Action ranging from establishing a predictive model for energy efficiency retrofits in New York City buildings to a mobile texting app that prevents the sale of counterfeit prescription drugs in the developing world, from designing a lightweight water filtration backpack that provides drinkable water in disaster zones to support centers for victims of gender-based violence in Pakistan.
The CGI U meeting takes place at an accredited college or university each year, and previous CGI U meetings have been held at Tulane University, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Miami, the University of California at San Diego, the George Washington University, Washington University in St. Louis, Arizona State University, and the University of California at Berkeley.
To learn more, visit cgiu.org and follow us on Twitter @CGIU and Facebook at facebook.com
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 8th, 2017
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Mitch McConnell gives Elizabeth Warren’s 2020 presidential campaign an in-kind contribution.
BY JAMES HOHMANN The Washington Post
with Breanne Deppisch
MORNING INTELLIGENCE FOR LEADERS
David AxelrodVerified account
David Axelrod Retweeted Matt Viser
McConnell did @SenatorSessions no favors tonight by shutting down @SenWarren. Strong-armed tactics looked weak & defensive.David Axelrod added,
Matt Viser @mviser
By a 49-to-43 vote, Senate rules that Elizabeth Warren broke rule impugning a senator. She now cannot speak during debate on Jeff Sessions.
THE BIG IDEA: Mitch McConnell defended his decision to have the Senate formally vote to block Elizabeth Warren from speaking about the nomination of Jeff Sessions to be attorney general. “She was warned,” he said. “She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted.”
The majority leader said the firebrand from Massachusetts broke the chamber’s rules by reading past statements about Sessions from Coretta Scott King and Ted Kennedy. “The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama,” McConnell said, setting up a series of exceptionally rare roll-call votes to silence Warren until Sessions is confirmed.
— In these angry times, the activist base of the Democratic Party wants its politicians to be fighters. When Republicans were in the wilderness, the party’s base valued hostility toward Barack Obama more than ideological purity. That’s how Donald Trump became the GOP’s standard bearer. The same principle will now apply for exiled Democrats. For the purposes of winning the 2020 nomination, it will be impossible to be too anti-Trump.
— McConnell gagging Warren is one of the best gifts she could have received, and her birthday is not even until June. It solidifies her bona fides as a fighter for progressive causes. Just hours before the showdown on the floor, which Warren had not planned for, the former Harvard Law professor announced that she will come out with a book this spring called “This Fight is Our Fight.”
— The brouhaha will be especially resonant because it touches race and gender, two of the most volatile fault lines in American life. During Black History Month, McConnell specifically cited portions of a letter that the widow of Martin Luther King Jr. wrote to the Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to Sessions’s 1986 nomination to be a federal judge as a justification for the votes to rebuke Warren. “Mr. Sessions has used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens,” King wrote three decades ago, referencing prosecutions he oversaw as the U.S. attorney for Alabama.
As Barack Obama’s former top strategist, David Axelrod, puts it as we wrote at the op of our posting.
— Sanctioning Warren also gives her underlying message a much bigger platform: She was speaking to a nearly empty chamber against a nominee who, no matter what, is going to get confirmed later today. Very few people paid attention to similar floor speeches against Betsy DeVos the night before. Now millions of people will read the letter that King wrote.
Rachel Maddow interrupted her MSNBC show for a live telephone interview with Warren. “I’ve been red-carded on Sen. Sessions,” she lamented. The senator then went into another room in the Capitol and read King’s letter aloud on Facebook Live. By morning, it had more than 5.2 million views:
— This really could help Warren make inroads with African Americans: There are relatively few black voters in Massachusetts, but members of the community will determine who wins the South Carolina primary in three years (it’s coming up faster than you think). Bernie Sanders just might have stopped Hillary Clinton if he had figured out a way to break through her firewall with African American voters. So there is no doubt that Warren World celebrated as groups like the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus quickly rallied behind her.
— The top trending hashtags on Twitter overnight are all about the donnybrook: #LetLizSpeak and #ShePersisted. An online clothing site for independent designers, RedBubble.com, is even selling “She Persisted” T-shirts and sweatshirts. Thousands of people are posting pictures of strong women throughout history with the caption #ShePersisted
What we see now is an Administration hand picked by a Maverick whose mind seems set to destroy America. His ideal is a Mighty Mouse that scares everyone but has no power.
THE OLD EAGLE HAS TAKEN OFF AND THE NEED FOR COURAGEOUS FIGHTERS IS OBVIOUS IN ORDER TO RISE DECENT AMERICANS WHO WILL FINALLY SEE THAT “MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” WAS JUST AN
Following an unusually tense conflict on the Senate floor Tuesday night, the chamber is scheduled to vote Wednesday evening on the fate of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), whose record on civil and voting rights as a federal prosecutor and state attorney general has long been criticized. Sessions is expected to win confirmation narrowly and largely along party lines — and primarily on the strength of his relationships with fellow Republican senators.
But the expected Trump victory comes after a bruising confirmation process for Sessions and other Cabinet nominees that Democrats have used to amplify their concerns about the president’s agenda — even as they have fallen short of derailing any nominees.
But will Senator Chuck Schumer show the mettle needed to stand up to McConnell?
In our opinion no sense here to try for the diplomatic compromise. There is no compromising if the issue is the dismantling of America.